Multi-stakeholder collaboration in wind power planning

(1)

Department of Forest Economics

Multi-stakeholder collaboration in wind

power planning

Intressentsamråd vid vindkraftsetablering

Emmy Bwimba

Master Thesis • 30 hp

Environmental Economics and Management Master Thesis, No 7

(2)

Multi-stakeholder collaboration in wind power planning

Intressentsamråd vid vindkraftsetablering Emmy Bwimba

Supervisor: Cecilia Mark-Herbert, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Economics

Examiner: Anders Roos, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Economics

Credits: 30 hp

Level: Advanced level, A2E

Course title: Master thesis in Business Administration

Course code: EX0925

Programme/education: Environmental Economics and Management Course coordinating department: Department of Forest Economics

Place of publication: Uppsala

Year of publication: 2019

Title of series: Master Thesis

Part number: 7

Online publication: https://stud.epsilon.slu.se

Keywords: collaborative participation, participation, legitimacy theory, social license to operate, stakeholders, stakeholder theory, wind energy

intressenter, legitimitetsteori, samråd, samverkan, vindkraft

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Faculty of Forest Sciences

(3)

iii

Summary

Wind power industry is rapidly growing in Sweden. The country has decided that by year 2020, the share of renewable energy will be 50 % of total renewable energy supplied in the country (Vindval, 2013). Wind energy is perceived by many as the future of renewable energy especially in northern Europe. However, wind power projects have encountered many obstacles from various stakeholders that includes environmental organizations, local opposition and bureaucratic challenges from local government. This is because wind power projects alter nature and competes with human interest. Wind power development projects are prone to these challenges since they involve the erection of tall windmills across wide-open landscapes that are deemed controversial and unacceptable to local community.

Since these interest groups perceive and use landscape in very different ways and for numerous purposes, they can directly or indirectly influence wind power projects. However, several critics aimed at wind power projects have witnessed the shortcomings in collaborating with these stakeholders. This has led to authoritative rejection of project implementation, permit applications and strong community opposition that consequently and significantly increase costs. This in addition, delays the project, and in the process destroys wind power industry reputation. There is general indication that a weak stakeholder management process in the planning phases can cause problems to the project or worse, in many cases lead to project failure and abandonment by the developer companies.

The aim of this research project is to explain conditions in the multi-collaboration in wind power planning. The thesis describes the motivations for the developer company to engage in multiple collaboration with other stakeholders in the wind power planning. The thesis applies stakeholder theory to explain the interdependencies among various stakeholders with different objectives. In this research, the developer company Svevind was placed at the center of network and in most parts of this thesis is described as convener to define its central role in initiating stakeholder networks throughout the planning processes.

Theoretical framework of theories and models that explains push factors triggering a developer company to engage in multiple collaboration was developed and used to make clear understanding of the project. The push factors are thought to be stakeholder influence/pressure, company’s strategic management and legitimacy of the company, these factors mostly forces the company to initiate multiple networks to balance its own objectives with stakeholders’ needs.

The results from the project indicate that developer company engages in multiple collaboration due to the wind power planning system in Sweden that it self involves various institutions, and bureaucratic hierarchies. The need for complying with codes and acts of the institution together with developer’s need to gain social license to operate to maintain reputation and legitimacy in the region, leads to engagement in multiple networks with various stakeholders. In this wind power project, a number of actors have participated, and this study explains how these collaborations are initiated and sustained. The results were analyzed based on theories only to find that some networks are created not only due to the company’s need to harmonize its objectives but with need to comply with rules and acts developed by the government institutions.

Keywords: collaborative participation, legitimacy theory, social license to operate,

(4)

iv

Sammanfattning

Vindkraftsindustrin växer i Sverige. Det kan förklaras av ett politiskt mål att förnybar energi skall utgöra 50 % av förnyelsebar energi i landet 2020. Vindkraft uppfattas av många som en framtida energikälla, speciellt i norra Europa. Trots politiska mål och en positiv inställning i allmänhet möter vindkraftsaktörer på utmaningar i form av motsättningar i målbilder i utveckling av nya projekt. Här möts vindkraftsindustrin med lokalpolitiska representanter och intresse-organisationer som har andra prioriteringar och åsikter. Ett vindkraftverk blir ett kontroversiellt inslag i landskapsbilden. Ytterligare utmaningar för vindkraftsindustrin utgörs av upplevd byråkrati på många nivåer. Det betyder att vindkraftverksinvesteringar möter många utmaningar.

Många intressentgrupper har behov och intressen av att påverka hur landskapsbilden utvecklas och hur resurser används. De kan påverka utvecklingen av vindkraftverk direkt och indirekt, genom politik. Svårigheterna att skapa forum för dialog där motstridiga viljor kan få mötas, långa ledtider i ansöksförvaranden, och svårigheter att leda ett större investeringsprojekt på ett inkluderande sätt. Detta är de viktigaste utmaningarna för vindkraftsutveckling.

Syftet med detta projekt är att förklara förutsättningar för multi-intressentsamarbete i vinkdraftsplanering. I projektet beskrivs motiv för vindraftsaktörer att engagera intressenter i planeringsfasen av en vindkraftsinvestering. Intressentteori används som teoretisk ram för att förklara beroenden mellan intressenter med olika målbilder. I fallstudien har Svevind en central roll i ett nätverksbyggande med relevanta intressenter i planeringsprocessen.

En teoretisk ram har valts av modeller som förklarar vad som driver och stimulerar samverkan i så kallade intressentnätverk (multi stakeholder collaboration). Drivande faktorer, främst makt, legitimitet och förväntade resultat förklarar vindkraftsproducenters behov av att förankra en planeringsprocess av ett stort investeringsprojekt som ett vindkraftverk innebär.

Resultaten i studien pekar på behov för vindkraftsföretaget att förankra investeringen tidigt i planeringsprocessen. Förankringen görs i dialoger med ett stort antal intressenter, som utgör ett nätverk för projektet. Den leder till förståelse för stegvisa förfaranden i byråkratiska processer, dialog för att stärka vindkrafts-legitimitet och insikter om hur dessa nätverk kan utvecklas och användas. I projektrapporten redogör ett antal intressenter för deras bild av hur nätverks-samarbetet har utvecklats och underhållits. Slutsatserna i projektet stödjer tidigare forskning som pekar på företagsbehov av att harmonisera interna mål med samhällsmål och regler i en stegvis process.

(5)

v

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who made it possible to complete this master thesis.

First, I offer my sincerest gratitude to my thesis supervisor Cecilia Mark-Herbert, who has supported me throughout the thesis process with her guidance, comments and inspiration. Without her help, completing this thesis would not have been possible.

I would also like to thank the entire reference people from different organizations and companies whom I met for interviews. They have invested their valuable time on this project and provided a lot of useful information that have made this research possible. My special thanks to Stefan Lundmark from Pitea Municipality.

Lastly, I would like to thank my special wife faith Bwimba and my daughter Tyra Bwimba for giving me space and time to work on this research and supporting me emotionally.

(6)

vi

Abbreviations

CAB County Administrative Board EWEA European Wind Energy Association EIA Environmental Impact Assessment MSC Multi-stakeholder Collaboration NIMBY Not in My Back Yard

NGOs Non-Governmental Organization PSM Project Stakeholder Management TWh Terrawatt hours

SDS Sustainable Development Strategy SSNC Swedish society for nature conservation SWOT Strength Weakness Opportunities Threats

(7)

vii

1 Introduction

This chapter gives the description and background of the research study. It describes the problem, and how the research study aims to address it. The chapter also identifies research questions that provides analytical processes to make conclusion, then it gives the outline of the study.

Sustainability has become popular in policy-oriented research as an expression of what public policies ought to achieve (Robert, Parris, & Leiserowitz, 2005). The principal inspiration of the term came from the Brundtland Report of 1987. This report adopted definition of sustainable development, which is defined as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987, 41). Since then the concept has developed in meaning to cover various development initiatives (Kuhlman & Farrington, 2010).

Sustainability oriented projects have become increasingly globalized, contributing significantly to the social, environmental and economic growth of nation states and for the local communities (García-Rodríguez, Gil-Soto, & Ruiz-Rosa, 2012). Hence the management of these type of projects is not restricted to only the basic planning, executing, monitoring and evaluation of the project, but also includes the management of many stakeholder groups and factors that are relevant but may reside outside the conventional boundaries of a project (Alves, Wagner Mainardes, & Raposo, 2012). Evidently, large-scale infrastructural construction projects that intrude structurally into local communities or affect the environment such as altering the landscape or changing the traditional activities of the area are particularly prone to increased local and environmental critics.

Energy generation is a highly controversial issue, that often gives rise to conflicts between citizens, municipalities, industry, environmental organizations, public agencies and parliament (Lidskog, Soneryd, & Uggla, 2005). Energy system cannot be simply viewed as a mere assemblage of technologies and related infrastructure, but as being deeply embedded within society.As such, this gives rise to a new created type-institution that involves various stakeholders with discrete opinions (Lozano & Kusyk, 2007). The most prominent example is the deployment of wind farms on land. The complexity, deepness and versatility of the wind power project, it entails the involvement of a large variety of interest groups. Stakeholder involvement largely accounts for the success of sustainable projects particularly that of complex projects in both development and implementation (Labuschagne, Brent, & Claasen, 2005). In a project context, these stakeholders are usually numerous, and can vary significantly in the degree of influence (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997). The strong cooperation of stakeholders is necessary for project success, since a project can be considered a temporary organization of stakeholders pursuing common objective.

The global concern for climate change and reduction objective of carbon emission has significantly resulted to the current state of strong support for the development of renewable energy as an alternative source. Of all the renewable energy options, wind energy is considered as one of the most technologically viable and cost-effective options. Wind energy is considered to be the clean energy that has the potential for diversification of energy supply (Morthorst & Chandler, 2004). However, similar to other forms of large-scale resource and land uses, the planning and siting of wind energy projects constitutes an illustrative example of a multiple use- multiple user dilemma (Hurley & Walker, 2004). It involves a range of conflicting values and stakeholders. Despite its proposed benefits, claiming land for wind power generation inevitably clashes with the demands of several local extractive and non-extractive uses, such as reindeer

(10)

2

grazing lands, areas for tourism and recreational use, hunting activities as well as claims on sustained biodiversity and nature conservation for both environmental, economic and cultural reasons.

1.1 Problem background

Fossil fuels have been the main energy generation source for many years, but concerns regarding Carbon dioxide emissions and climate change have motivated the search for alternative energy systems that can reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses while providing clean energy to the world population (Pure Power - wind energy targets for 2020 and 2030, 2011). Energy goals across the countries, like the Europe 2020 Energy package have been emphasized on the producing the so-called “Clean energy” that do not lead to the use of fossil fuels. Wind energy is one of the most outstanding in this context, with this goal various large-scale wind power projects were developed and implemented (National network for Wind energy utilization, 2017,11). In Sweden, the share of renewable energy is forecasted to be 50 % in 2020 (Science for policy report, 2018) .But the target was already met by 2012 with 54% share of renewable energy. The goals that have been set by the Swedish Parliament are higher. The target is 100% renewable energy by 2040. In 2010, 3.51 TWh of wind electricity was produced (Swedish Energy Agency, 2010, 15). In the later part of 2011, production of electricity from wind power was 5.25 TWh (Swedish Energy Agency, 2011, 18). Several of the Swedish environmental quality goals can be attributed to wind power projects (Environmental Council, 2013, 18, n.d.).

Wind energy is a renewable source of energy that nature itself provides, and regarded by many as long-term solution to the current challenge of global warming (The effects of wind power on human interest, 2013, 24.).

1.2 Problem

Attitudes to global issues of environment and sustainable development can give an idea of how people think about energy issues in general (Johansson & Laike, 2007). In both political practice and public opinions, the expansion of wind power as an energy source generally receives strong support as a remedy for global climate change (Waldo, 2012).

In first instance, on shore wind projects were few and had the possibility of being located on areas where the sites would not affect or compete with other human interest. The deployment of wind mills in water have not lasted for so long, this was mainly due to the more benefits in shifting projects from offshore to onshore (Gibbons, 2015).

However, the rising momentum of the Wind projects in many different parts of Sweden put a much of pressure on forestry, farming, hunting, pollution, conservation, recreational activities and raised Conflict of interest between wind Power Companies and various stakeholders that are directly or indirectly affected by the projects (Kristina, 2014.) Most of the projects have encountered opposition from NGOs, local communities, associations and individuals.

Wind power projects have become subject of criticism especially during operational phase due to their conflicting of interest with different stakeholder’s groups and individuals. Local community, organizations and professional associations are against wind power projects especially during the implementation and operational phases and this has become a critical issue in the development and planning of this renewable energy source (Jobert, Laborgne, & Mimler, 2007). Although nuancing a simplistic NIMBY-ism explanation, the literature on acceptance for wind power, nevertheless, highlights the importance of the local context, including socioeconomic factors, the

(11)

3

quality of social relations like trust, impacts on the local physical environment, residents’ attachment to the area and other political reasons (Firestone, 2012).

These multidimensional issues place increasing pressure on organization to strengthen the legitimacy of collective decisions by incorporating public input and negotiating conflicting interests throughout the policy and planning processes (Waldo,2012).

Efforts for searching the roots of this problem resulted in finding the central problem in something beyond the usual complains against just wind turbines but it lies in the way different groups should work together to achieve a long term common objective.

1.3 Aim and delimitation

The aim of the research project is to explain the conditions for multi-stakeholder collaboration in wind power planning.

Wind power planning involves various stakeholders; the study had identified different stakeholder groups that are related to the planning. The research project explains the motivations behind the developer company to engage in multiple collaboration and degree of engagement of various groups in wind power planning

The research aim involves the following questions

 What are the motivations for multi-stakeholder collaboration for Wind power planning?

 How are the stakeholders engaged in a wind power planning?

The research project is based on development of stakeholder theory that as gone beyond the concept of social acceptance. The theory has dominated latest technological development especially in energy sector, in less than two decades, this topic has evolved from a marginal and little studied point of discussion to be at the forefront of broader debates in the social sciences (Fournis, 2017). With wind energy being a key area of this study. The application of either theory or concept of social acceptance will attempt to show how multiple stakeholders can affect or influence the performance and sustainability of project a mess.

Therefore, in recognition of this conceptual weakness, the psychological social acceptance of community stakeholder or any other interest group to implementation and operational of wind power projects was not discussed in this study.

1.4 Organization of the study

The illustration below (Figure 1) outlines the organization of this study project and aims to simplify the structure of this research paper.

Figure 1. Illustrates the eight chapters of the research study. The intention is to make smooth transition through the chapters.

(12)

4

Chapter one starts with the introduction which presents the background of the problem, aim of

the study with research questions guiding the analytical process and provides the scope and the limitation. Chapter two is dedicated to the review of literature, previous research and studies on Multi-stakeholder theories and concepts as a tool project management. at the end, the brief overview of the wind energy industry was provided and make the justification for choice of case study used in the research project. In chapter three, the research method and approach used in the study were described and highlighted activities that were carried out in conducting the research and processes involved to ensure quality and ethics of the data. It also describes the justification of the processes and choices made, while acknowledging scope and limitations to our research methods and approach. Chapter four gives short background on the empirical study and presents the data and findings collected from the various sources. Chapter five analyses the empirical findings with the help of conceptual framework developed earlier in the study.

Chapter six analyses the empirical findings using the selected terminologies and models in the

theoretical conceptual framework. The theories that were presented are applied on the empirical results that were found in the research study. Chapter seven responds to the research questions raised in chapter one. It also opens a discussion about how the empirics and analysis connects to findings in other studies. Chapter eight intends to address the aim of the study. It also describes the need for further research in relation to the studied subject.

(13)

5

2 Literature review and theoretical perspective

In this chapter, the relevant theories, concepts and models are presented and basements for the empirical studies. The chapter starts by looking into depth the stakeholder theory, bends the theory in context of project management, strategies, tools and analysis for engagement of stakeholders are also discussed, and this will be followed by describing multi-stakeholder phenomena. The phenomena refer to a project as open entity existing in interdependent relationship with external operating environment. The combination of this theories and concepts will assist the research to build conceptual framework that will be used to analyze the empirics.

2.1 Stakeholder Theory

By early 1970s, the stakeholder concept began to appear in numerous articles in the strategic planning literatures. Since then the definition of stakeholder has developed in several interpretations and scope and covers wide range of concepts. (Taylor & Irving, 1971) claimed that business would eventually be run for the benefit of stakeholders and are risking to diminish, if they do not comply with stakeholder’s needs.

The study of stakeholders was further explained in (Frooman, 1999) work that developing stakeholder concept for the strategy literature.He defined stakeholder relationships in terms of both influences and responsibilities. He described these factors in as bi- directional: the firm towards its stakeholders and stakeholders towards the firm. He also addressed the difficult challenge of deciding whom a firm should include as relevant stakeholders in decision-making processes. The author concluded by outlining ways in which a firm can deal more effectively with stakeholders, with an emphasis on open communications, consultation and increased interactions. Perhaps his most important insight, from the perspective of where the field of strategic management has evolved. In current practice, the common understanding is that stakeholders can be used as active participants in strategic decisions.

In wider sense, a stakeholder is anyone who can influence the success of an organization (Freeman, 1984, 43). This involves the competition, potential consumers, and public interest groups. From a narrow sense, a stakeholder is anyone involved in the management and the function of an organization such as employees, suppliers, and shareowners (Freeman and Reed, 1983; Freeman, 1984). Whatever the precise definition of a stakeholder is or can be, an organization, or a firm, is seen in the center of the stakeholder thinking (Mitchell et al., 1997). The concept highlights the fact that companies have constant interactions with different stakeholders (Retolaza, Ruiz, & San‐Jose, 2009). The stakeholder concept and approach have intended to enlarge managerial visions of the importance of stakeholders in a company environment so that instead of traditional shareholder profit maximization also the interests of stakeholders are to be taken into account in decision-making and strategic planning. The stakeholder theory, in contrast and more precisely, has intended to identify which stakeholder groups require or deserve attention from the company management (Mitchell et al., 1997). Various streams of literatures identify stakeholders as either primary, critical to the success of the organization, or secondary, instrumental or influenced by the industry ((Sautter & Leisen, 1999). Stakeholder theory’s principal idea is that the success of an organization is linked to the degree of how well the organization succeeds to manage its relationships with various stakeholders (Freeman, 1984). Stakeholder theory is seen as a pluralist conception of society where multiple interest groups are identified and their needs and relative welfare considered (Cooper, 2004,5). The stakeholder theory can be used in three different aspects to serve

(14)

6

normative, descriptive and instrumental objectives (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). When the theory is used in normative way, it tries to identify stakeholders according to their interest on the corporation, whether or not the corporation has any interests towards them, and the interests of stakeholders have intrinsic value. When the theory is used in a descriptive way, it offers concepts and language to describe and understand the corporation and defines the corporation as a constellation of cooperative and competitive interests bearing the same intrinsic value.The use of theory in instrumental way links the corporate performance as a result of stakeholder management and the stakeholder management process itself.

While there is no general accepted definition of stakeholder, the project is required to identify its stakeholders in order to address a set of stakeholder objectives. The decision therefore about how to define stakeholder is consequential as it affects who and what counts in the process (Mitchell et al, 1997). This study opts the broader definition of stakeholder as most precisely given by Freeman (1984,46) as any group or individual who can affect, be affected or perceived itself as affected by the set of project activities. Special attention is given to the interests and well-being of those who can assist or hinder the achievement of the project objectives is the central admonition of stakeholder theory (Sweeney & Coughlan, 2003).

The research looks broadly at the general stakeholder management framework but the main emphasis is the degree of engagement, which assists to answer the current problem in wind power projects. Different tools including stakeholder management frame and stakeholder engagement strategy was applied. Stakeholder engagement tool was developed and applied.

2.1.1 Multi-stakeholder collaboration

Multi-stakeholder collaboration has caught the interest of numerous studies mainly due to its alignment with sustainable development to address societal and environmental issues (Kuenkel, 2019). The literature defines multi-stakeholder collaboration in many different ways using different terminologies and depending on the context (Glasbergen, Biermann, & Mol, 2007, 239 ).Such collaborations terminologies are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Different Terminology related to the context of multi-stakeholder collaboration

Terminology Author

Multi-stakeholder platform (Turcotte & Pasquero, 2001)

Multi-stakeholder consultation (Biermann, Chan, Mert, & Pattberg, 2007)

Multi-stakeholder Governance 1 Fransen, 2012

Multi-stakeholder Initiative (Pattberg & Widerberg, 2016)

Multi-stakeholder learning networks Calton & Payne, 2003

Multi-stakeholder regulation (Albareda, Lozano, Tencati, Midttun, & Perrini, 2008)

Multi-stakeholder partnerships (Austin, 2000)

In the context of this research paper, collaborations including multiple (i.e. more than two) stakeholder groups for solving a common complex problem, is the area of interest. And more specifically, the focus is on multi-stakeholder collaboration related to wind power projects, the development and implementation of wind power has become subject of criticism and inefficiency collaboration among actors has become one of the most prominent factor.

(15)

7

The original design of the stakeholder collaboration was developed from stakeholder network that was consisted of a spoke-and-wheel model where the company was seen in the middle of the representation surrounded by different stakeholders (Freeman, 1984). The traditional approaches taken by companies to ‘manage’ their relationships with stakeholders have reflected the mechanistic worldview that has dominated society’s way of thinking since the industrial revolution(A. C. Svendsen & Laberge, 2005).In a mechanistic world, firm behave like closed systems that are independent of their operating environment, and aims to control relationships with internal and external stakeholders to achieve their own objectives (Andriof, Waddock, & Waddock, 2017). The company is at the center or hub of a number of bilateral relationships and engagements to the external environment. A network perspective can offer advantages since different stakeholder groups influence strategies differently (Vandekerckhove & Dentchev, 2005).

The term multi-stakeholder collaboration is the common ground behind these different terms (Kuenkel, 2019).It can be defined as the attempt to solve problems collaboratively, or jointly drive change for the common good, across the boundaries of societal sectors and institutions (Ibid, 2019). In Ayala-Orozco et al (2018), it is referred to as the interactive process in which actors with diverse points of view work together, implementing collective action, and sharing risks, resources, and responsibilities to achieve common goal. Hence emerged as a response to the complex challenges ahead (Kuenkel and Schaefer 2013; Lozano 2007).

As part of their stakeholder management activities, companies identify issues to be discussed with stakeholders and then decide which individuals or groups to involve based on an assessment of their power, legitimacy and the urgency of their claims (Mitchell et al. 1997). Svendsen and Laberge (2005) also argue that traditional corporate stakeholder engagement methods cannot solve cross-boundary, interdependent and complex situations. Instead, these complex situations need a systems approach for problem solving. ‘Systems thinking’ is a way of understanding how things relate and influence each other, and it is all about interdependence, and seeing the whole picture rather than concentrating on the separate parts (Jackson, 2003). Systems thinking view of stakeholder network describes the network as an interactive space with multiple set of stakeholders (Figure 2).The stakeholders in these networks share a complex and co-dependent problem and have a need to talk about it (Calton & Payne, 2003). Systems thinking is fundamental to the new role of network convenor in set of stakeholders.

Figure 2. The difference between perspectives in research is illustrated in two principle figures of a traditional organization-centric stakeholder model (on the left) and a systems-thinking view of stakeholder theory (on the right) in accordance with Svendsen & Laberge (2005, 97).

(16)

8

Stakeholder network a system view is more than bilateral relationship but an organization that exists in a symbiotic and interdependent interaction with external environment (A. Svendsen, 1998). Generally, stakeholder thinking has transformed from management of stakeholders to networks and relationships with them (Andriof & Waddock, 2002). What differentiates stakeholder collaboration from other groups are system of networks where actors from each setting provides platform for learning through consultation processes.

2.1.2 Networks and Consultation in Multi-stakeholder platform

Roloff, (2008, 32) suggested that multi-stakeholder networks cannot be solely defined through their business participants, rather are networks in which actors from civil society, business and governmental institutions come together in order to find a common approach and solution to an issue that affects them all ( Figure 3 ).

Figure 3. Stakeholder networks as tripartite (Roloff, 2008b, 43, with modifications by the author).

Multi stakeholder network holder is wider than just three actors, it is often linked to larger-scale projects, always including multiple partners and sometimes even handling complex issues (Murray, Hudson, & Haynes, 2010). In context of large complex projects, multi-stakeholder collaborations understood to be networks in which actors from civil society, business and governmental institutions come together in order to find a common approach to an issue that affects them all (Roloff,2008).

2.1.3 Multi-stakeholder engagement in collaboration

Although stakeholder engagement has been recognized as important in project management, scholars have not reached common understanding about what stakeholder engagement means or what should be the characteristics of effective engagement (Hemmati & Hohnen, 2002). In various literature like Freeman et al (2007, 311) new narrative of capitalism, stakeholder engagement is one of the several principles for realizing stakeholder capitalism “to successfully create, trade and sustain value, a business must engage its stakeholders. However, it does not indicate specific aspects about how to engage, who are the stakeholders and at what extent which are the most common questions. However, Greenwood (2007) describes stakeholder engagement as set of activities and practices that the organization undertakes to involve stakeholders in a positive way in organizational planning and operations. This definition has

(17)

9

reinforced the emphasis on the positive nature of stakeholder engagement for creating values with benefits to both the organization and the stakeholders.

Stakeholder engagement is often seen as trust-based, dialogue that involves consultation and interactive processes between organization and its stakeholders. It differs from stakeholder management which is more one-sided process and serves more for company interest by identifying stakeholders, determining their importance to the company and then managing them appropriately (Curzon, 2009,273).The (Hemmati, 2002) also differentiates between active and passive involvement of stakeholders’ role in the company´s activities and further elaborates engagement for risk control and for collaboration. Stakeholders are seen as risk to traditional management, but they are currently viewed as active collaborators and partners to create opportunities for organization (Hemmati, 2002). Therefore, stakeholder engagement put more emphasis on the equal status between business and multiple stakeholder.

2.1.4 The process flow of stakeholder engagement

Organizations can no longer choose if they want to engage with stakeholders or not; the only decision they need to take is when and how successfully to engage according to Greenwood (2007, 315).Stakeholder engagement is premised on the notion that those groups that can affect or are affected by the achievements of an organization’s purpose should be given the opportunity to influence and input into the development of decisions that affect them (Sloan & Oliver, 2013). The engagement based on collaboration with stakeholders can create more opportunities in terms of learning, innovation and fundamental corporate transformation, compared to the traditional and common practice of controlling (Dawkins, 2014). As with any other business process, the process for engagement should be systematic, logical as well as practical. Sutterfield, Friday-Stroud, & Shivers-Blackwell (2006) provides seven steps in a continuous and dynamic stakeholder engagement processes that describes engagement from the starting point of planning and identifying objectives through to post monitoring and evaluation (Figure 4).

Figure 4. The flow of stakeholder of stakeholder engagement Sutterfield, 2006, 9 modified by the author.

The terminology of stakeholder and stakeholder engagement has become increasingly common parlance in international business circles in the last decade, particularly with regard to social

(18)

10

and environmental performance (Harrison & Wicks, 2013). Engagement should be regarded as any other business project planning process, with adequate analysis, preparation, implementation, reporting, evaluation and follow up. The ideal stakeholder engagement process should be an iterative process, allowing engagement to benefit from diligent planning, thorough reporting and the application of learning because of appropriate evaluation and monitoring.

Stage 1, planning: Identify your basic objectives, issues to address and the stakeholder’s

priorities as relevant to the organization.

Stage 2, understand your stakeholders: Identify the urgency stakeholders feel for their issues,

the legitimacy of their needs and the power they have to influence the organization. Understanding stakeholders interest and needs and how this are related with organizations’ wants and needs stakeholders. Having an understanding of stakeholder’s motivation, objectives and issues, and which of those are shared between both organization and stakeholders, will help with profiling the priority stakeholders. The common stakeholder engagement techniques are based on an initial segmentation of stakeholders. It is presented below in the Mitchell, Ages and Wood model from 1997 (Figure 5).

Figure 5. The theory of stakeholder identification and salience (Mitchel et al, 1997, 872).

Mitchell et al. (1997) states that a stakeholder group has power when it can impose its will on the firm, especially through the control of resources, while legitimacy implies that a stakeholder group reflects the prevailing opinions and norms of society. Urgency is characterized as stakeholder sensitivity to the response time of managers. This classification can help to assess with whom an organization should engage with.

Stage 3, preparing internally to engage: Dedicate appropriate time and resources to identify

possible commonalities between your organization and the stakeholders – to identify possible ways into dialogue and win-win situations. Agree the commitment your organization will give to stakeholder engagement and the process, which may mean building the business case and identifying internal advocates (Bryson, 2004).

(19)

11

Stage 4, building trust: Different stakeholders will come with different levels of trust and

willingness to trust others. Organization should be aware of this. Therefore, adapt to the level of trust present and needed.

Stage 5, consultation: an overall success assumes the following in consultation:

The practicality of consultation includes personal interviews, workshops, focus groups, public meetings, surveys, participatory tools and stakeholder forums and panels.

1. Fair representation of all stakeholders, not only direct ones.

2. Be responsive by providing information and proposals that respond directly to their interest previously identified, not just information responding to your internal objectives and goals. The consultation process should be material to the organization’s key economic, social and environmental objectives.

Stage 6, respond and implement: Decide on a course of action for each issue agreed upon –

understanding possible stakeholder reactions to your proposal will help you to develop a more successful plan of action.

Stage 7, monitor, evaluate and learnt: Knowledge management is critical for capturing

information and sharing what is learned. Transparency of the process is greatly aided by accurate documentation, especially if your organization reports on stakeholder engagement and consultation.

2.2 Stakeholder collaboration in Wind power planning

In Sweden, stakeholders especially local community have quite legal rights to participate in both land use planning and in handling of environmental applications for the wind power project (Swedish energy agency, 2001). Within the wind power planning, there is no legal requirement to involve stakeholders. However, the so-called municipality veto gives rights to the community to reject the project. Moreover, stakeholder participation is often recommended by national and regional authorities in order to avoid conflicts and possible rejection of the project (Ibid, 2001). Ling et al (2002) emphasizes on importance of cooperation and collaboration among different stakeholders in wind power planning. The main reasons given are; the possibility to identify wider public opinions, the ease of sharing information, develop expertize knowledge and furthering of legitimacy.

Stakeholder collaboration is also considered to improve planning in terms of acceptance and ability to generate public support, and at the same time, it promotes social justice and sustainability of the project and external environment (Healey, 1993). However, developer companies have long been not considering collaboration as a crucial factor in success of their projects. Contrary, stakeholders were involved in project implementation, and this bears risk that stakeholders may obstruct project (Ling et al, 2002). The current wind power industry empathizes on increased stakeholder participation. However, the goals, methods of engagement, and targeted stakeholder groups differ widely. It varies from informing large groups within local community to building long-term partnerships with specific but common interest (Irvin et al, 2004). It seems, however that, stakeholder groups are more diverse than just local community. The actors seen as stakeholders of wind power projects are those actors that directly influence the outcome or development of project, ranging from NGOs, community to government stakeholders (Ibid, 2004).

(20)

12

This way of conceptualizing stakeholders in wind power planning might increase the possibility to involve the targeted stakeholders and can ease stakeholder identification. On other hand, this way may exclude un-organized group of stakeholder in the region who might not be viewed as directly involved in the project (Few et al, 2007). From this discussion, one can also make remarks on the way the stakeholders think themselves as involved in the project. From the stakeholder perspective, collaboration and level of engagement have different meaning from information to partnership. Participation can be one way where developer companies come with information about the project or can be collaborative where consultative meetings can be held as part of project planning. In addition, the latter comes with sharing of responsibility to achieve common objective. This type also brings in sustainable solution to complex problems (Ibid, 2007).

Therefore, with stakeholder perspective, collaboration in later stages of the project are similar to no collaboration and one-way communication is seen as chain of command. Collaboration is often successful if stakeholders are seen as facilitators in solving complex problems to allow smooth implementation of project activities. Bilateral collaboration is seen as important step approach in wind power planning to achieve common objective. Moving from project-based interaction to more strategic collaboration through creating stakeholder forums and open dialogues throughout the project life cycle is the reason why some wind power projects fails to achieve their goals (Irvin et al, 2004).

2.3 Legitimacy theory of a firm

Legitimacy of the project or a firm theory posits that organizations continually seek to ensure that they operate within the bounds and norms of their respective societies (Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975). This theory describes perception of stakeholders including society, in this particular project towards wind power companies, which reflects the need for the windmill companies to create conducive operational environment. Legitimacy is a general perception or assumption that the actions of the firm are desirable, proper, appropriate and useful within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions ( Greenwood et al, 2008).

Legitimacy of a project or a firm is based on three dimensions (Greenwood et al, 2008). The first is the perceptions of beneficial outcomes from the project and its behavior, the second is project’s compliance with unconscious, taken for societal expectations (cognitive legitimacy), and the last dimension is moral judgment that is based on an argumentative process (moral legitimacy) in which it is judged discursively whether an activity is ‘‘the right thing to do. Stakeholder engagement and legitimacy are two non-separable concepts; involvement of multiple stakeholders is widely seen as a sign of legitimate of the project. If the engagement is effective, trust will be fostered and actions of the project are seen as social and morally right. Wind power projects often seeks to justify their actions that have long been subject of dispute.

2.4 A conceptual framework

The framework describes the interdependence between the concepts, theories, strategies and tools. In the next chapter, these models, concepts and theories are used to analyze the data. Stakeholder collaboration is at the center of this model. One could suggest that there are various reasons for a company to engagie in collaboration yet, there are few main factors and the most commonly stated reason for joining these collaborations is something unique. Many contemporary social issues require partnerships across sectors and necessitate public and private actors working together (Osborne, 2000). However, in this model, legitimacy, external influence, power strategic management were mentioned to be the main reasons for a company

(21)

13

to engage in multi-collaboration. Figure 6 provides conceptual frame to understand the interdependence.

Figure 6. A conceptual framework for the project (Motivational factors for a company to engage in multiple networks).

The Figure 6 demonstrates the most prominent motivational factors for the developer company to engage in multiple collaboration. According to (Kimiagari et al , 2013). The modern stakeholders have less trust in authority than ever before, and want to be directly involved in decisions that affects their interest. Then, this has exerted pressure on companies that are directly or indirectly intervenes in their interests. Individuals and organizations want to be engaged in meaningful ways,at appropriate times, at varying levels and in ways that they can influence (Svendsen & Laberge, 2005). Arguing from the organizational view, the conceptual frameworkdescribes a firm as center of bilateral relationships. Then, as part of their stakeholder management activities, companies identify issues to be discussed with stakeholders, and then decide which individuals or groups to involve. As the part of their strategic management and to achieve social license hence legitimacy (Mitchel et al,1997). Therefore, this framework explains the factors that pushes the company as convener to engage in collaboration both the company strategy and pressure from the stakeholders are the push factors and strategies taken by a developer company as response from the pressure, power and legitimacy are presented on the bottom of the framework.

The Figure attempts to show the prominent factors that motivates the developer company to create networks, and how the engagement is done. The figure responds to the main questions of this research study. The model is aware that Developer Company in wind power industry is at the center of collaboration. Companies are responsible for relationship with external stakeholders and typically function as gatekeepers and benefactors. Their role is to buffer the external environmental of company with stakeholders (Svendsen & Laberge, 2005).

(22)

14

Gatekeepers identify legitimacy, power and urgency of the external stakeholders and ensure that appropriate actions are taken. Under stakeholder theory, legitimate stakeholders are really valuable to gain social base in society. Powerful and influential stakeholders matters most for a company to continue its existence. Company is at risk of losing legitimate and stop its operations if it fails to harmonize their actions with stakeholders (Mitchel et al, 1997).

Furthermore, model 7 illustrates the strategies actions initiated by the company after considering the need for collaboration based on previous facts (legitimacy, power, influence and management). The strategic actions depends on the motivational factors. However, the strategic action is designing engagement strategies, designing management framework and need for identification of who stakeholder in first hand. The developer company’s focus is both long-term and short term success of the company. Therefore, its duty of the company to find out various strategies and solutions to engage with stakeholders to avoid future mis-understanding.

With this conceptual frame, one can clearly identify stakeholder conditions for wind power planning, the motivations and how the engagement as the primary initiative of the company. The Framework enables analysis in that, the relevant push factors that motivates Svevind to consult various stakeholders are identified on the top of the model. Svevind consults different stakeholders depending on the most significant factor. Since the factors are dynamic, more than one factor can push the company to engage in collaboration. One example is that Svevind can consult local community due to the power factor, this is through the community power through the municipality veto or the company can consult citizen to gain social base through legitimacy.

(23)

15

3 Method

Making choices is part of every research project, and it always has attached tradeoffs. It is sometimes difficult to establish from qualitative research what the researcher actually did and how he or she arrived at the study’s conclusion (Bryman, 2008,392). This chapter explains the choices made along the research procedure and provides the ground for understanding the choice of approach, methods and cases used in the study processes to ensure a transparent and rigorous research process, and to show the external validity aspects of the study. The chapter used literature review, case study and multiple interviews with relevant stakeholders.

3.1 Research Approach

To link the research philosophy to the particular approach and to close the gap between the problem and theories, both the deductive and inductive approach have been applied in the study (so called abductive). According to Saunders et al (2019), this approach means that the researcher develops a theory and hypothesis and put forward a research strategy to test the hypothesis while in the latter, the researcher collects data and develops theory as an indication of data analysis.

As the involvement of different players in both development and implementation of wind power projects has become popular discourse especially regarding sustainability of renewable energy projects, inductive reasoning is more emphasized on throughout the discussions in the research project.

Then, the data collected was of qualitative nature and the researcher used content analysis to analyze the set of information provided by stakeholders. Content analysis is the technique used to make replicable and valid inferences by interpreting textual materials. By systematically evaluating texts (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The content analysis involves explaining the relationships between two or more concepts. one concept is viewed as having no inherent meaning and rather the meaningful text is a product of the relationships among different concepts.one of the most usefulness of content analysis is direct examination of communication using text, when used after interviews, it provides insight into complex models of an individual thought (ibid, 2005). In analysis of semi-structured interviews with stakeholder respondents, research analyzed the materials using content analysis and referring to the unit of analysis. The unit of analysis in this case is consultation. The aim was to attain a condensed and narrow description of the multi collaboration concept in well and clearly defined way.

Different sources of information have facilitated the better understanding of the research study. The research consisted of three streams of data source:

 A literature review to provide the basis for theoretical background related to the analysis and management of stakeholders, the relevance of the stakeholders in a project management context, and the application to issues concerning wind power planning.  A search and review of industry-specific secondary data sources, such as governmental

policy documents and case studies of wind power projects and developer companies in connection to the consultation and management of relevant stakeholders (From internet and library articles).

 Interviews with numerous stakeholders in the wind power industry with experience in partnership management and working in multi-stakeholder environment.

(24)

16

3.1.1 Case study

A case study is an approach that focuses on understanding the various phenomenon within a single context (Dubois & Gadde, 2002).Case study can be applied in many different ways. It could be, for example a study of an individual person, a group or an entity (Robson, 2002). In a case study approach, the researcher collects information about the case by typically using multiple data collection techniques over a given period of time (Yin, 2014) . A single case can help provide a more depth and understanding of the phenomenon in the context, then if multiple cases were used (Ibid, 2014). Case studies can accomplish many different objectives, for example it can be used to develop theory, test theory or to provide descriptions (Doz, 2011).A case study should be considered important when the focus of the study is to answer “how” and “why” questions and when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not well defined ( Baxter and Susan Jack, 2008) . The case study approach is flexible in methods of accessing information and the data can be collected using a combination of different data collection techniques (Dilshad & Latif (2013). Such as interviews, personal observations, and external or internal documents (Bhattacherjee, 2012). However, there are number of critics raised towards the case study design due to the possibilities of the researcher being influenced by the participants in the case study (Yin, 2009). To get rid of any bias, the research has taken the latter into consideration throughout the data collection processes to actively avoid biases. However, it is impossible to be completely objective(Bryman,2004). A case study design was selected to be used because it allowed the researcher to use a combination of data collection techniques and many other sources of evidence in order to gain deeper understanding of the subjects that are still unmapped or that have gained little attention.

The case of Svevind is chosen mainly because, Svevind’s Markbygden projects is the largest in Sweden and Europe, it involves collaborating with different stakeholders that are directly affected by the project such as Sami Community, forest owners, farmers, hunters or those that are indirectly affected like Non-governmental organizations and municipality. The project involves erection of very large wind turbines that are subject to noise pollution and covers large area of land that was traditionally for foresters, farmers and partly for reindeer herders as well being home for biodiversity. Another reason is that, various companies in Sweden that are engaged in wind energy either in development, Construction and operations or in combination of both. Many of them are operating in southern Sweden but Svevind being one of the biggest companies and operates in different parts of Sweden has taken the initiative to operate in Pitea kommun, Norrbotten county, a place known to have Sami population.

This is in spite of the claim by Hinshelwood & McCallum (2001,89) that, greater emphasis on community engagement at all levels in the development of wind energy represents a strategic move and is both ethically important and cost-effective in the long term goals of the project. Then, the study of multi-stakeholder collaboration is well suited in wind power planning projects. Stakeholder Groups acts as focal point for discussion and consultation through the planning and implementation of wind project in any given area, the involvement of the group provides representation of their primary interests within the plan frontage, ensuring consideration of all interests during review of issues. Therefore, collaboration in the form consultation is unit of analysis of the study. Consultation of the group offers a more participatory process in the planning and day-to-day operations. This group can be involved through meetings/workshops and stakeholder forums.

Therefore, using specific case study of such big company like Svevind and the relevant stakeholders will provide in depth knowledge regarding stakeholder’s collaboration in other wind power projects. Though the stakeholders might differ in different context depending on the interest of local groups and organizations but the concept of collaboration will remain the

(25)

17

same. When looking at the study, it is more relevant than using many case companies and there by getting only shallow key stakeholders and their interests.

Furthermore, in using case study with key stakeholders, it has given researcher a space for conducting semi-structured interviews with each stakeholder which would have been impossible with many case companies.

3.1.2 Justification of the case and the unit of analysis

In this research project, case study was chosen which is a “comprehensive research strategy” according to Yin (2003). The author suggested that case study method should be used when the subject of study is highly related to the context.

For the purpose of this study that involves multiple actors ranging from individual, groups, associations and society at large, a case of the company that is engaged in wind power was chosen.When identifying possible cases, the researcher should select the case units by using purposive sampling process as opposed to other sampling procedures. Those cases that are perfectly appropriate for the nature of the research questions should be selected (Bryman, 2004). And if the study involves the use of interviewing methods, it is also vital to select the interviewees based on their personal connection to the issue that is being studied as well as their willingness to participate in the study. The interviewees should not be selected based on accessibility or mere convenience (Ibid, 2004).

Wind power developments, most especially on-shore, are amongst the most technically proven and commercially viable renewable energy technologies and its prospect is considered potential over the coming years (Centre for renewable energy et al, 2007). Despite its proposed benefits and advocates, the realization of any wind power project is a hazardous and uncertain activity and entails the interaction between multitudes of different actors (Rönnborg,2006). It is not well recognized that achieving successful implementation of renewable energy projects needs the smooth collaboration with multiple (Broome et al, 2014) in Hinshelwood & McCallum, 2001, 13).

Szarka (2006) declares greater emphasis on community involvement at all levels in the development of renewable energy gives a strategic step and is both ethically useful and cost-effective in the long-term goals of the project. Then, the study of multi-stakeholder collaboration fits in wind power planning projects.Interest groups acts are subject to discussion and consultation through the planning and implementation of wind project in any given area, the involvement of the group provides representation of their primary interests within the plan process, ensuring consideration of different interests during review of issues. Hence, collaboration in the form consultation is the measure of collaboration dynamics. Consultation of the group opens a room for more participatory process in the planning and daily operations. The group can be involved through meetings/workshops, sending information and any other way of communication.

3.2 Research design and delimitation

The research is based on the case on Svevind solutions AB and its collaborating partners, the company has facilitated the data collection. The case based study helped the researcher to achieve increased knowledge about the subject multi collaboration that involves company and various stakeholders that probably would have been more difficult to measure without central convener. Nevertheless, the information provided by a single company might be one-sided depending on companies’ business and management model. This might have forced the data access into certain directions since the company decided what information they wanted to share

(26)

18

(Robson, 2011). And particularly, in this case, Wind power projects have become a subject of debate, then companies are more reluctant to disclose their management and operational procedures.

3.2.1 Theoretical and empirical delimitation

The choice of a theoretical framework is an important part of the research and it has a major influence on the further analysis of the results. It also works as assurance that the research is in line with other researchers understanding of the subject (Robson, 2011). As there are other many limitations in the research paper, so it is in theoretical framework. Theoretical framework has mainly focused on multiple collaboration that based on stakeholder theory and legitimacy. The frameworks help to explain what triggers Svevind to engage in multiple collaboration and describes outstanding factors such as management strategy, stakeholder influence and pressure as well as need to legitimize its existence and social license to operate. A stakeholder theory describes the stakeholder network as a living system; it is more than the sum of its parts. Company as a convenor see itself as existing in a symbiotic, interdependent relationship with its external operating environment (Svendsen 1998; Andriof and Waddock 2002). Then, this view suggests, therefore, that the long-term sustainability of the organization depends on the well-being of the social and natural systems in which it is embedded (Post, 2002). Legitimacy determines the social acceptance of businesses and their conduct by the society. It is understood as a social construction and therefore, derived and operated through social interactions. This makes the perception of legitimacy subject to change (Jost & Major, 2001). Legitimacy was considered the driver for engagement in multi-collaboration to gain social license to operate. However, there are number of theories that was not included in the conceptual frame and have they been used, probably research would have given different results. The good examples are organizational theory and participatory planning, the former its principles are applied in attempts to make businesses operate more effectively, through creating networks and engaging with community. The latter can be applied since wind power planning involves various organization and institutions, then participatory approach can explain the need for company or local government to involve partners.

Wind Power project was selected basically due to the recent criticism that was targeted to the companies (Nordic energy report, 2012). Most of the critiques point to violating rights, destroying biodiversity, altering landscape and pollution against the will of other actors. High wind energy potentials are particularly correlated to exposed terrain, higher altitudes and mountainous regions. However, these high Alpine landscapes are strongly associated with conserved nature, cultural identification and space for recreational activities (The effects of wind power on human-interest report, 2013, 32). Particularly for northern Sweden, it is severely complicated by the pronounced ethical, ethno-political and constitutional difficulties arising, as the proposed wind power projects collides with the land use interests of the indigenous Sami population. Although the legal status of Sami land use rights in Sweden is still rather unclear and is the subject of a number of high profile court cases (Reimerson, 2016) . Further delimitation has also been communication between the research and interviewee in which language has become barrier at point, and potential message could have been distorted or lost original (Waldo, 2012)meaning.